Final Thoughts

After having explored the different ways in which water supply and sanitation can have gender implications, as well as offering my view on potential solutions along the way,  I am slowly reaching the end of my discussion. Nonetheless, and having saved the best for last, this week I would like to look into what I think is the best way of closing the gender gap: by making sure men and women have an equal say in the ‘water world’. Put simply, if water management is to be a democratic process, then women cannot be under-represented - and although there has been a significant shift at the top-level, with more women taking on the roles of water ministers, the real change needs to be felt at the grassroots level. 

In South Africa, the government decided to address this by putting incentives in place such as ‘Women in Water’ awards and bursaries for young women to take up careers in the water sector. By implementing such programmes, they hope to slowly shift the policy focus from one of a general improvement of physical water supply to a more gender-oriented and targeted approach. Nonetheless, there is still the need to put in place more locally focused policies; examples of this could include to allow women to identify water sources in the village as well as to decide on the location of water pumps. Research has shown that when women become involved in the implementation and maintenance of water projects the incidence of misuse and breakdown decreases considerably (UN). 

Having been largely inspired to take on this theme by Kevany and Huisingh’s paper (‘A review of progress in empowerment of women in rural water management decision-making process’), I thought it would be appropriate to conclude my findings by critically summarising this paper which covers all the main issues I explored. 

All in all, the message that the authors are attempting to convey is that “the voice of women is central to the formulation of appropriate and sustainable water management” - and although it is undeniable that women play a pivotal role in the managing and sustaining of water, this is rarely reflected within institutions. Therefore, as the authors suggest, there is a need to implement specific policy goals which are aimed at equating opportunities across genders. One of the ways of doing this is by promoting community-based water initiatives which would require the involvement of women throughout the different stages of the project, from decision-making to the implementation and execution. The authors also believe that while practices which promote gender empowerment are beneficial for their own sake, they could also have an influence in achieving more than an efficient use of water (Panda, 2007; Singh, 2006; Shiva, 2002). As I mentioned in my introductory post, there is a need to remember that there is a two-way relationship between gender empowerment and water. 

A brief example illustrating the benefits of involving women in the decision-making process is put forward by Shah (2002) who examines a participatory irrigation management project in Gambia where women were held responsible for the construction and maintenance of the field channels. Not only did this allow them to develop their project management skills, but also provided them with a channel for raising their voice against unfair compensation. 

I’ve put together a checklist with three main points which I believe summarises what I’ve learnt throughout the process of writing this blog. The three points can be interpreted as what I deem the “best practice” methods for the involvement of women in water projects: 

1. There is a need for a system in place to identify the differences in roles, positions and privileges of both genders and the resulting community dynamics 

2. Women need to be more actively represented at all stages - from the initial decision-making through to the execution.

3. There should be a monitoring system in place which evaluates the level of gender equality of the project throughout the different stages as well as providing the stakeholders with a final “result”. 

In conclusion, and as put forward by Cornwall and Gaventa, the status of citizens can and should be aided through a shift in focus from ‘users and choosers’ to ‘makers and shapers’(2001). I will leave you with this thought...

Water for Sale?

This week, I will be focusing on the issue of the unequal burden of water privatisation on women. Water privatisation is, unarguably, one of the water crisis’ most contended topics although its mostly negative impact on the livelihoods of women is rarely discussed. I thought the best way to approach this would be to critically analyse a case study - after some research, I came across a paper by Rebecca Brown entitled ‘Unequal Burden: Water Privatisation and Human Rights in Tanzania’ which seemed to encapsulate both sides of the story. 

Brown starts by setting the context by describing how the social system in Tanzania, as in many African countries, emphasises the role of women as being responsible for the provision and maintenance of water in the household. Hence, the lack of presence of a fair public water system often has a disproportionate impact on women since ‘they are the ones who generally have to fill in when the state abdicates its social service responsibilities’ (Yamin 2005,1233). Brown identifies a number of shortcomings to the mechanisms behind water privatisation - namely the application of a business model approach to such a human-rights based issue as water provision. Although Brown’s general conclusion is that water privatisation puts an unequal burden on women, she also clearly states that this is a result of the inherent gender discrimination in African societies, whereby women are sacrificing their education, health and livelihood to ensure sufficient water is available for their household (as has been discussed in previous posts in the blog). 

Nonetheless, progress is under way. In the past couple of years, there have been an increase in civil societies in Tanzania speaking out against water privatisation and its impact oh human rights; and prominently on the human rights of women. One particular concern they expressed was contract renegotiation, where private water providers bid low on contracts and then demand renegotiation by stating they had “inadequate information”. This has especially negative consequences on severely poor countries like Tanzania, where the livelihoods of individuals are reliant on this source of water supply. 

Brown does not seem to offer concrete solutions to the issue (apart from suggesting an immediate halt in water privatisation which seems unlikely at this stage). My suggested solutions would be to involve women in the decision-making process - from the designing of the project to the implementation and monitoring. However, I will be addressing the exact importance of women entering the spaces of social, political and economic power in more detail on my next post. Watch this space...

"Capacity Building" as Key to Gender Integration

This week, I will be exploring the importance of “capacity building” in optimising the impact of water initiatives. For those of you who may be unfamiliar with the term, I provide a general definition below taken from ‘The Africa Water Page’:

"Capacity building is the process whereby a community equips itself to undertake the necessary functions of governance and service provision in a sustainable fashion. The process of capacity building must be aimed at both increasing access to resources and to changing the power relationships between the parties involved. Capacity building is not only constrained to officials and technicians but must also include the general awareness of the local population regarding their services and development in general."

The chart above shows the different components involved in the process of "capacity-building" and how these can be measured using a threshold (or benchmark). 

In general, most government-funded water projects which include some element of training often target water resources specialists - very few programmes are actually aimed at educating communities about how to best manage their water supply. This has especially significant consequences for women; who are the main managers of water supply in the household. In my opinion, every technology-driven water and sanitation initiative should also come hand in hand with community-based schemes in order to ensure its sustainability.

In her paper for the Women for Water Partnership, Prabha Khosla contends that what makes capacity-building in the water sector different is the need for initiatives that focus on both women and men, as well as women-only constituencies. She argues this will also require trainers that are engaged with the notion of gender equality and women empowerment and applauds approaches articulated in Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) which specifically include gender analysis. She expressed the need for water organisations to hire gender specialists as part of their core staff - this would allow for capacity-building on gender to be perceived as an ongoing programme and not a one-time activity.

On the more practical level, there has been an increasing number of initiatives which have made an effort to integrate the community in water and sanitation programmes. An example is the Ghana Rural Water Project (Poku Sam, 2006), which aimed to address a serious infestation of guinea worm and poor access to potable drinking water. The project, which was initially technology-driven and externally sourced, was then adapted to include a more demand sensitive approach and was rated as having a high community involvement. The fact that village members, and especially women, were more aware of how the new water facilities worked as well as being able to have a say in the development of the project contributed to gender integration in the community. Moreover, the project has also lead to an increase in the education of girls in the community mostly owing to the hygiene and sanitation training they received as part of the initiative.

"Sanitation Deficit"

Although water and sanitation goals are often though about as interdependent, numerous studies have pointed out to the “sanitation deficit”, especially in light of the recently concluded Millennium Development Goals. Hence, I thought I would address this issue separately from access to water under the topic of gender equality. 

While the MDG regarding access to safe drinking water and sanitation was officially targeted in 2010, there are still more than 2.2 million people in developing countries which die from diseases associated with inadequate sanitation and poor hygiene. The cause of death is mostly by (easily prevented) waterborne diseases such as diarrhoea, cholera and typhoid. The newly introduced Sustainable Development Goals dedicate SDG 6 to the promotion of “equitable access to safe drinking water and improved sanitation”, with sub-target 6.2 outlining “special attention to the needs of women and girls”.

In an article written for ‘The Conversion’, Professor Sarah Jewitt studied nine schools in Kisumu (Kenya’s third largest city), by interviewing girls regarding their hygienic concerns. 

In the nine districts, both pupils and teachers pin-pointed menstruation-related issues as one of the main causes of absenteeisms within girls with many schoolgirls admitting they felt “embarrassed” and almost forced to stay at home. The somewhat promising finding was that, if girls had access to sanitary towels, absenteeism from school would dramatically drop. However, these often cost between 65 and 120 Kenyan Shillings (US$0.79–$1.45) and are unaffordable to families earning the average Kenyan daily income of just above US$1 per day. 

Nonetheless, even those who do attend school often miss out socially and academically, says Professor Jewitt. In the conducted interviews, several girls admitted to sitting in the classroom all day in case they leaked, preventing them from going out to play during break. Others also refused to answer questions in lessons since they must stand up to do so and were worried other pupils might spot the stain on their uniforms since most uniforms are light in colour. 

In some cases, even if girls with access to reliable sanitary protection were more likely to attend school, this access came at a high price. Two head teachers disclosed that it was not rare that girls would agree to engage in sexual relations with older men in exchange for sanitary products. 

Practical solutions might include a shift in etiquette to allow girls to answer questions while seated and take toilet breaks without punishment, or the provision of painkillers for menstrual cramps alongside changing the uniform colour to a darker tone. However, in my opinion, the real solution lies behind the need to address the broader challenges regarding cultural norms and gender roles in Africa. This should also come hand in hand with the breaking down of the cultural silence which surrounds menstruation and puberty in many regions of Africa. 

The Fight for Female Farmers

Even conventional discussions on gender and water quickly reach the conclusion that issues not apparently related to water are at the root cause of the problem - one of them being women’s limited access to land (van Koppen 2002). In my opinion, lack of access to land is one of the main underlying causes of women’s limited access to water: a recent World Bank study shows that this is the key reason why female-headed households are more prone to poverty. In many developing countries, land ownership is a precondition for access to water. 

Even though women are usually considered domestic water users while men are viewed as productive water users, women have an increasingly crucial input into income-generating activities which demand a reliable water supply. Not only are their responsible for food production, they also have a central duty in establishing the sustainable use of resources in small-scale fishing communities, as well as the management of watersheds and wetlands.

By recognising the role of women as land holders, this would increase their access to irrigation water for agricultural purposes and positively contribute to the development agenda. However, this is still not the case - numerous instances have been documented in which female farmers were bluntly excluded in the construction of new irrigation schemes (Zwarteveen 1994, Merrey and Bakisvar 1998). 

Upadhyay (2004) argues that access of women to water for productive use not only increases their income earning potential but also helps strengthen their bargaining positions. The author focuses her research on the Banaskantha district in India, where she concludes that the present practice of water allocation entails a great deal of inequality. Productive uses of water which are mostly employed by women - such as livestock rearing, vegetable farming and brick-making - are often included in the less-visible informal sector and marginalised from the water allocation priorities. In turn, this often results in conflict amongst household members which further limits their future decision-making abilities due to the inherent patriarchal customs. The solution, as suggested by Upadhyay, is to implement appropriate institutional support and access to resources. 

The recognition of women’s needs for water as productive users will strengthen their bargaining position within the household as well as increase their independent entitlements which is essential in achieving overall gender equality. 

Where to Begin - Improving Physical Access to Water

One of the major factors, if not the main one, of achieving gender equality and promoting sustainable development goals is improving the physical access to safe water. 

In most African countries, women are the primary collectors, users and managers of household water - often having to travel far to search for water for household use. Hence, an improvement in access to water will allow women, as well as girls, to devote more time to their personal and “professional” pursuits - whether this is simply going to school or being involved in water and sanitation management projects. 

Despite their role and contribution to the management of water, women are often very minimally involved in the drafting of water-related projects. Although the overall objective is to involve women in all stages of the process, when focusing on increasing the physical access to water, there is a specific need of the involvement of women in the design-stage of the project. 

An example where this was largely overlooked is given by Grafton et al, in ‘Water Resources and Planning Management’, where women in rural villages in Nepal complained that their water collection time increased nearly four or five times after they received improved water services. This was mainly owing to the fact that the tap-stands were placed alongside a main road, which meant they could not bathe freely or comfortably wash their clothes used during menstruation for shame of being seen by males. In order to overcome this situation, women had to carry water all the way to their households several times a day - 3 villages even reported waiting until dark to collect the water. All of this would have been avoided if women had been initially involved in designing the tap-stands. 

The benefits of having an accessible source of water supply are immense, as is shown in the video below: 

The video highlights the benefits of a recent installation of a water point (financed by UNICEF) in a rural village in Somalia. The advantages of such an initiative can be summarised under four areas:

• Gender roles: women have more hours per day to use more productively on their farms, in their households and for other activities;
• Education: enrollment of girls in primary/secondary schools has increased relative to boys; 
• Access to water: farming practices have improved due to reliable access to water; and
• Health and hygiene: waterborne diseases such as diarrhoea have significantly declined.

As can be seen, providing physically accessible clean water is essential for empowering women and girls and pushing gender equality forward. 

Gender Mainstreaming at the Policy-Level

Following on from my previous post, I have decided to adopt a “top-down” approach to the issue. In other words, I will start by looking at “gender mainstreaming” at the policy level and will then go on to explore case studies/media pieces which illustrate how these best-practice policies are being effectively implemented at the local scale (or not in some cases…). 

The importance and value of including both men and women in the overall management of water and sanitation supplies has been at the forefront of public policy debate since the 1970s, when the UN hosted its Water Conference at Mar del Plata.

This was duly followed by the International Drinking Water and Sanitation Decade (1981-90) and the International Conference on Water and Environment in Dublin (1992), alongside numerous references in implementation plans and resolutions such as Agenda 211.

Arguably the most important resolution, or at least the most publicised one, was the UN’s Water for Life Decade (2005-2015) which appeals to the involvement of women in water-related development efforts and coincided with the Millennium Development Goals - more on this in the chart below). 

More recent (and exciting) trends include a rise in the number of women appointed as water ministers, including H.E. Maria Mutagamba, Minister of State for Water of Uganda, and currently the chair of the African Ministerial Council on Water. 

Although in my previous post I mentioned that there is the need to look at both sides of the equation, meaning how gender equality impacts access to water/improved sanitation and vice-versa, it is actually more than often the case that showing how water projects improve with the involvement of women has a greater effect in terms of financing than illustrating how access to water contributes to gender equality.

The Water and Sanitation Program, which is administered by the World Bank, identifies the following indicators of best-practice “gender-mainstreaming”:

• The existence of gender specific objectives within national and sector level policies.
• The existence of gender policies within agencies involved in sector development.
• Water and sanitation equity distribution ratios and percentage of population on-network vs. off-network
• Proportion of income spent by women and men in accessing water and sanitation services 

In the coming weeks, I will be applying these indicators to case studies of water and sanitation initiatives in Africa. I will use them as a means of evaluating the extent to which they have been effective in promoting gender equality by making the concerns and experiences of women, as well as men, an integral dimension of all stages of the projects.